During the first half of the current school year, New York City public schools reported a decline in student suspensions even as the number of assaults within school buildings increased, raising questions about the effectiveness of restorative justice practices that have been widely adopted by the district.
The New York City Department of Education recorded an 8.3 percent decrease in suspensions compared to the same period last year. Suspensions for the most serious offenses dropped by more than 21 percent. However, data from the New York Police Department’s school safety division shows that felony assaults involving individuals under 21 during school hours rose by 20 percent, increasing from 28 to 34 incidents. These incidents encompass various offenses, including felony assaults, assaults on children, hate crimes, gang-related attacks, and strangulations.
The discrepancy between the falling suspension rates and rising violent incidents highlights potential gaps in how school discipline is implemented and recorded. New York City’s education system has increasingly embraced restorative justice as its preferred disciplinary approach. This method prioritizes communication, mediation, and reconciliation over punitive consequences, aiming to “repair the harms” caused by student misconduct. Restorative justice involves structured dialogues among the responsible student, the victim, and a facilitator, focusing on understanding the incident and agreeing on reparations instead of applying traditional penalties like suspension.
Initially developed as an alternative to incarceration within the juvenile justice system, restorative justice was incorporated into school disciplinary codes partly to address persistent racial disparities in suspension rates. The discipline code officially promotes restorative practices as a foundational response to student misbehavior, reflecting a broader national trend in urban districts such as Los Angeles, Baltimore, Chicago, and Oakland.
Despite these goals, the rise in serious incidents suggests restorative justice may not fully address behavioral challenges in schools. The Department of Education publishes suspension statistics but does not provide data on serious incidents that do not result in suspension, while police records capture these occurrences. Experts note that if restorative justice were reducing violent behavior effectively, a concurrent decline in serious incidents should be observable.
Further complicating the picture, school administrators face increased restrictions on suspensions and removals. Over the past decade, authority to suspend students has shifted upward, with suspensions for younger students requiring central office approval and documentation of efforts to manage behavior without removal. For lengthier suspensions, sign-off from the chancellor is mandated.
Among those repeatedly suspended, students with disabilities are disproportionately represented, making up nearly half of repeat suspensions despite constituting about 22 percent of total enrollment. Black students also experience a higher rate of repeated suspensions—41 percent compared to their 19 percent share of enrollment—indicating persistent disparities despite the restorative framework.
Research on the efficacy of restorative justice in schools remains mixed. A randomized controlled trial conducted in 2022 across several Brooklyn high schools found no significant improvements in school climate, behavior, or academics attributable to restorative justice programs.
Funding for these programs continues, with $12 million allocated for the 2025-26 school year through combined state and city sources. However, New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s recent executive budget does not include a renewal of the city’s contribution beyond this fiscal year, marking a shift from his earlier campaign support for restorative justice.
Observers argue that simply reducing funding will not resolve underlying issues. To improve school safety and student outcomes, clear disciplinary policies that maintain accountability for serious conduct are needed, alongside adequate support for educators tasked with enforcing these standards. As disruptions persist, concerns grow that students already vulnerable to academic setbacks will suffer most in environments lacking consistency and order.